While googling for boondocking info, I ran onto this http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Docume........istedDispersedCampingNationalForests.ppt powerpoint presentation. I was wondering if any boondockers are aware of this and what their opinion is. The organization is The Wilderness Society and they're based in DC. Do boondockers and/or RV dispersed campers have any representative lobbyist organizations? Should RVers who want to use National Forests or other public lands be concerned? I am only asking to try and find out what's going on, if anything.
Please excuse the somewhat sloppy post.
rvme
Slideshow highlighting the impacts caused by cross-country travel by motor vehicle for dispersed camping
Slideshow developed by the Southern Rockies Conservation Alliance highlighting the impacts that cross-country travel by motorized vehicles for purposes of dispersed camping can have on public lands. Presentation uses images and figures produced by the USFS.
I think we should be concerned, but I am of two minds -- yes, I like to boondock. But I often see damaged done by careless boondockers, especially those who ride ATVs. Obviously, this is a tiny minority of ATV folks, but they are making the rest of us boondockers look bad.
I think the solution is to require boondockers to buy some sort of annual pass and to use the funds to pay for adequate law enforcement. I have always wondered why the national forests are "free." That means that the general public taxpayers are paying for my recreation. I would not mind paying my fair share.
Had to download Powerpoint for that one. The Southern Rockies Conservation Alliance has some concerns but if you were from Washington, Oregon or Idaho you might find them a little bit laughable. The Forest Service in the 70's pretty much let the logging industry do what it wanted and large sections of forest were taken out. A small 40 section clear cut plus logging roads probably does more damage than the camping the the SRCA pointed out. I have seen horse packers and ATV users pack more trash and destroy more pristine mountain meadows than boondockers do. From what I have seen around here where boondockers camp after it gets used too heavily the FS closes it off for several years. On the other had the destruction 8-10 miles in on multi use trails is a lot harder to control. Sometimes the ATV's get banned but the horse packers can haul a lot of trash into an area and often times just leave it. The last frame on the PPT was pretty funny though as it looks like they are targeting boondockers.
I boondock often. None of the areas (USFS and BLM) in which I boondock allows going off existing roads or breaking new ground to create a campsite. I follow the rules. Some don't, and they give the rest of us a bad name.
Re an organization to lobby for us: I don't think there is one. However, every forest that re-does its general plan has multiple public meetings to obtain input and also often has instructions for postal or e-mail input on its website. If you believe in something, tell the planners so! Giving input doesn't mean that you will always get your way, but at least you will be heard. The planners cannot read our minds!
User groups can influence the local FS District more than you think. Where I live last year the FS spent thousands of dollars converting a 16 mile single track multi-use trail into a double track so quads could run the lap. I was totally floored to see them building bridges, and widening the trail with a mini excavator. The ATV lobby went to meetings, persuaded the FS to do the job and funded the job. I will say in this particular area the ATV groups do a nice job of keeping the area clean and generally staying on the trails.
I've been an avid hiker for much of my long life, and I've probably spent a hundred days doing volunteer trail building and maintenance for the California state parks and the USFS. During that time, we did projects like making sure that overhead clearance was sufficient for horseback riders and converting single-track foot trails to much wider single-track mountain bike trails with lots of visibility at corners. Forest and park plans revised from user input led to these trail changes.
Horse and human-powered biking groups have powerful lobbies, as do ATV and OHV folks. Fortunately, many of them also require their members to perform trail work because they recognize the amount of work which goes into maintaining the types of trails they need or want.
rvme wrote: ...The organization is The Wilderness Society and they're based in DC...
The Wilderness Society would probably qualify as a domestic terrorist group if the DOJ really investigated them. Dave Foreman, former employee of the wilderness society and head of Earth First! publicy admitted Earth First! was created by the sierra club and wilderness society. Those two organizations jointly funded Earth First! because they wanted an organization more extremist than they were, thus making them (sierra club and wilderness society) look moderate in comparison.
Note the slide show shows many two tracks across dry flats, asserting that all 2-tracks equal environmental degradation.
They don't. Some are quite benign, and in some rare circumstances are arguably beneficial. Whether a user road constitutes a degradation of the soil and watershed depends on many factors, including but not limited to vegetation, soil, slope, slope position, climate, and amount and type of use. Hiking trails also negatively impact soils and watersheds. In one area near me the hiking trails in the canyon bottom contribute more erosion to the streams than the OHV trails on the ridgetops. Documented by FS soil scientists and hydrologists.
Some user roads are a problem. No one is disputing that. Situations need to be assessed on the ground one by one, not be a national one-size-fits-all policy. That is bad public lands policy and bad environmental activism.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
Log off and go camping!
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
As an Environmental Science Teacher with a degree in Environmental Science and an avid user of wilderness areas it is my professional opinion that many of the remarks made in that slideshow are utterly irresponsible. All of the wilderness camping spots in the slide show were pristine. Human impact on those areas are negligible. I could go on for ever about these "so-called" environmental protection groups. I've been fighting them all of my professional life. They are not nearly as interested in "protecting the environment" as they are controlling human behavior. They truly believe humans are intruders on Earth and we should cease and desist any and all mechanized progress. They are... well, I'll leave it at that. I don't want to get started...
68 Me & DW
93 DD
03 DD
06 F150 Screw 6.5' Bed, 4x4, 5.4, 3.73
04 Tahoe 23RB-GL Honda EU2000 Parallel Cables "I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for...food." Col. Jack O'Neill, Stargate SG-1.
Offline
